Railway Management Maturity Model (RM 3 )

Transcription

1 Railway Management Maturity Model (RM 3 ) (Version 1.02) March 2011 Published by the Office of Rail Regulation 1

2 Contents Introduction... 1 Excellence in safety management systems... 3 Governance, policy and leadership... 3 Organising for control and communication... 3 Securing the co-operation and competence of employees at all levels... 3 Planning and implementation of risk controls through co-ordinated management arrangements... 4 Monitoring, reviewing and auditing to provide effective governance, management and supervision... 4 Using the criteria... 5 The Railway Management Model s criteria... 6 Criterion SP: Policy, governance and leadership... 6 Purpose... 6 Introductory notes... 6 Relevant guidance and toolkits... 7 Subcriteria... 7 Sub-criterion SP1: Leadership... 7 Subcriterion SP2: Safety policy (not including written safety management systems)... 9 Subcriterion SP3: Board governance Subcriterion SP4: Written safety management system Criterion OP: Securing co-operation, competence and development of employees at all levels Purpose Introductory notes Subcriteria Subcriterion OP1: Worker involvement and internal co-operation Subcriterion OP2: Competence management system Criterion OC: Organising for control and communication Purpose Introductory notes Subcriteria Subcriterion OC1: Allocation of responsibilities Subcriterion OC2: Management and supervisory accountability Subcriterion OC3: Organisational structure Subcriterion OC4: Internal communication arrangements Subcriterion OC5: System safety and interface arrangements Subcriterion OC6: Organisational culture Subcriterion OC7: Record-keeping and document control Criteria PI and RCS: Planning and implementing risk controls through co-ordinated management arrangements Purpose Introductory notes Office of Rail Regulation March 2011 i

3 Subcriteria Subcriterion PI1: Risk assessment and management Subcriterion PI2: Objective/target setting Subcriterion PI3: Workload planning Subcriterion RCS1: Safe systems of work (including safety critical work) Subcriterion RCS2: Management of assets Subcriterion RCS3: Change management (process, organisational and engineering) Subcriterion RCS4: Control of contractors Subcriterion RCS5: Emergency planning Criterion MRA: Monitoring, audit and review Purpose Introductory notes Subcriteria Subcriterion MRA1: Proactive monitoring arrangements Subcriterion MRA2: Audit Subcriterion MRA3: Incident investigation Subcriterion MRA4: Management review Subcriterion MRA5: Corrective action Office of Rail Regulation March 2011

4 Introduction This document sets out the criteria we use to assess an organisation s ability to achieve excellence when controlling health and safety risks. The European Foundation for Quality Management (EFQM) describes truly excellent organisations as those which strive to satisfy their stakeholders by what they achieve, how they achieve it and what they are likely to achieve. Excellence is not a theory it relates to the real achievements of an organisation in what it does, how it does it, the results it gets and the confidence that these results will continue into the future. An excellent organisation also meets its legal requirements in an efficient way it considers the benefits to the organisation as a whole and actively looks for further improvements in controlling risk. Excellent organisations will show similar features. Safety management systems guidance such as HS(G) 65 and OHS18001 set out some of these features. Recent accident reports and academic research have identified other features. ORR have incorporated these features into a model (the Railway Management Maturity Model) that assesses an organisation s ability to achieve excellence in risk control. For each of these features we have defined assessment criteria. The model is demonstrated in the diagram below. The following section presents an overview of what excellence in safety management systems looks like. The model provides a consistent way of evaluating the management arrangements required by the Railways and other Guided Transport Systems (Safety) Regulations 2006 (ROGS) and the Management (Health and Safety at Work) Regulations Office of Rail Regulation March

5 Audit Proactive monitoring Emergency Planning Control of Contractors investigation Incident Review Management Monitoring, Audit and Review Corrective action Policy Policy Leadership Governance Written SMS Organisational Structure Change management Asset management Safe systems Workload planning Target setting Risk management RM3 Planning and Implementing Worker involvement Securing Cooperation and Competence Competence Management Allocation of Responsibilities Organising for Management and Control and supervisory Communication Record keeping Organisational culture Internal communication System safety and interface Figure 1 Overview of the Railway Management Maturity elements. Office of Rail Regulation March

6 Excellence in safety management systems Our aim is for organisations to achieve excellence in risk control. An organisation can only achieve this through effective management. The following descriptions have been set for each of the main areas of an effective management system. Governance, policy and leadership The organisation s policies are visionary, based on solid evidence of what the organisation can achieve, and promote a consistent approach to health and safety at all levels of the organisation. Leaders of the organisation set and communicate clear direction that reinforces a consistent approach to health and safety and shapes day-to-day activities. Leaders at all levels of the organisation act in a consistent way that reinforces the values, ethics and culture needed to meet their organisation s objectives. The leadership style throughout the organisation is transformational as opposed to transactional. Organising for control and communication The organisation is structured to help put the organisation s policies into practice as efficiently as possible. There is a clear understanding of how each person s role affects the organisation s ability to achieve specific goals and the overall objectives. The organisation provides the framework for using people, plant and processes successfully. Communications are highly effective up, down and across the organisation. Communications from management should be appropriate for the target audience. The right message should be received at the right time, by the right people, and through the appropriate channels. Securing the co-operation and competence of employees at all levels The competencies (knowledge, skills, experience and abilities) needed to work effectively, efficiently and safely are understood by the organisation. Office of Rail Regulation March

7 Recruitment, selection, training and continued development focus on meeting the organisation s objectives. Employees are actively involved in developing processes and making the business successful and safe. Planning and implementation of risk controls through coordinated management arrangements Organisations systematically implement processes to make sure that the plant, people and processes are fully used, continually improving effectiveness, efficiency and safety to achieve the organisation s objectives. Monitoring, reviewing and auditing to provide effective governance, management and supervision Monitoring is an important part of the organisation s management arrangements at all levels. Performance measures and audit programmes are used to continually encourage everyone to achieve the organisation s objectives and reduce the risk to the business. Variations from expected outcomes are reviewed to understand where the organisation is failing and what corrective action is necessary to restore performance. The organisation actively seeks opportunities to identify good practice from both within the organisation and from others. Office of Rail Regulation March

8 Using the criteria The model helps to guide our decision on whether an organisation s safety management system (SMS) can deliver excellence in risk control. The TEMS User Manual provides guidance on how we should plan inspections (both general inspections and specific SMS inspections) to gather evidence. It is for the account holder to form an opinion on whether the criteria and sub criteria are being met. The criteria are relatively general and should be used as a framework, taking account of the degree to which the criteria are established as normal in the organisation. Most models include a definition of the process needed to meet the criteria. We believe that the duty holder is the best person to decide the process by which a goal is met. However, this model does allow us to judge whether the organisation is progressing towards excellence, using a five-point maturity scale. The levels of maturity within the subcriteria are based on our experience with a range of duty holders. We will review the subcriteria as our experience increases. Version 2 of this model may include more detailed ways in which organisations can meet the criteria. It may also set out how organisations can progress within the criteria towards excellence. The level an organisation reaches on the 5 point scale will be judged by the account holder based on the evidence collected from inspection work. If there are mixed levels of achievement across objectives, the assessment should be based on what the majority of the evidence suggests, but with a comment which identifies areas for improvement. It is important that the analysis covers only the areas assessed. For example, reviewing the track patrolling in one region would not provide enough evidence to form a national opinion. Similarly, a review of one train operating company s driver depot would not provide a robust opinion of other depots. Therefore the evidence scope and timeliness should be considered when using the criteria. The recording spreadsheet (TEMS Form 4) provides for these factors to be recorded. Office of Rail Regulation March

9 The Railway Management Model s criteria Criterion SP: Policy, governance and leadership The organisation s policies are forward-thinking and based on solid evidence of what the organisation can achieve. Together with effective leadership, the policies promote a consistent approach to health and safety at all levels of the organisation. Leaders of the organisation set and communicate a clear direction for the organisation that reinforces a consistent approach to health and safety. Leaders at all levels of the organisation act in a consistent way to reinforce the values, ethics and culture needed to meet the organisation s objectives. The governance arrangements make sure that the organisation remains accountable for the health and safety of its workers and members of the public affected by their work. Purpose To make sure that the organisation is effectively governed and led. To make sure that each policy clearly expresses the top-level management expectation, accurately defining what the organisation wants to achieve, how it will achieve it (through effective leadership) and how management will know when that expectation has been met. To make sure that the organisation (specifically the board) effectively challenges whether a policy and its associated activity is correct, in place and effective. Introductory notes Failure to consider health and safety risks when the board makes decisions can have catastrophic results. Poor leadership has caused many high-profile safety failures. An organisation s approach to health and safety often reflects the attitudes of those who make business decisions, and it leads the opinions and attitudes of the staff who work within the organisation. The overall policy and associated procedures produced by the senior management is vital to setting and maintaining the organisation s approach to health and safety. The policy should give a clear understanding of how the organisation intends to manage health and safety. The senior team and other managers should also lead by example and act in ways that reinforce the messages contained within the policy. Executive officers within the organisation must be accountable for their actions relating to health and safety. The board s role is to ensure governance and hold the executive officers to account. This function is vital for preventing incidents such as Office of Rail Regulation March

10 that described in the Baker Report into the Texas City accident, and even the Walker Report into the governance of the UK banking system. Relevant guidance and toolkits HSE Guidance Document HS (G) 65 The Baker Report The Walker Report Subcriteria SP1: Leadership SP2: Safety policy SP3: Board governance SP4: Written safety management system Sub-criterion SP1: Leadership Good leadership relating to safety management involves: deciding and communicating the reasons for risk controls and the importance of good management, and promoting continued improvement; communicating and co-ordinating risk-control (including safety management) and improvement strategies across the organisation; making sure that all the units and managers act in line with the organisation s goals and strategies; adjusting the performance-management and reward systems so they help the organisation achieve its goals and strategies for improving safety and performance; and monitoring the organisation s improvement activities and results, and taking corrective action when necessary. The attitudes and decisions of senior managers are critical in setting and delivering the organisation s priorities. Two guidance documents are available. These are IND 277 Leadership in the Major Hazard Industries and INDG 417 Leading Health and Safety at Work. Office of Rail Regulation March

11 Level of achievement according to evidence Goal (excellence) Leaders at all levels of the organisation show shared values directed at continually meeting the business objectives safely. Leaders search for opportunities to make risk control in their area of the organisation as effective and efficient as possible. Leaders can inspire confidence and commitment, and safely take their teams through periods of change. Level 4 (predictable) Leadership activities are consistent with and reinforce the organisation s health and safety policies. The activities aim to have the maximum positive effect on the workforce. Leaders at all levels of the organisation are credible and open to ideas for improvement. Non-technical management skills are recognised and developed within the organisation. Level 3 (standardised) Leadership is still largely viewed as a senior management role. Senior management focus on improving ways to apply processes in a standardised way. The organisation is built around a command-and-control structure with little feedback. Level 2 (managed) Leadership is viewed as a senior management role. Managers demonstrate leadership skills but these are not recognised or used consistently within the organisation. Level 1 (ad hoc) There is no evidence of positive leadership at any level in the organisation. Relevant parts of the Railways and other Guided Transport Systems (Safety) Regulations 2006 None specifically. Office of Rail Regulation March

12 Subcriterion SP2: Safety policy (not including written safety management systems) Effective health and safety policies set a clear direction for the organisation to follow. They contribute to all aspects of a business s performance as part of a commitment to continuous improvement. Level of achievement according to evidence Goal (excellence) The health and safety policy is used to challenge the organisation to achieve business performance that is in line with the best-performing organisations. The health and safety policy recognises that managing health and safety risks is not a separate function but an integral part of a productive, competitive and profitable organisation. Health and safety risks are recognised as a risk to business performance. Level 4 (predictable) The health and safety policy is consistent with the actions of everyone acting in the management chain. The health and safety policy includes a realised commitment to continually improving the efficiency and effectiveness of risk controls. There is evidence of extensive collaboration throughout the management chain. The health and safety policy and any associated policies are: o consistent with each other; o reviewed and revised to drive improvements in a predictable way; and o interpreted in the same way by all parts of the organisation that apply them. Level 3 (standardised) The health and safety policy and any other associated policies are used as a focus for managers, which results in them being interpreted in the same way by all staff. Employees are actively involved in reviewing and revising the health and safety policy and how it is applied. Office of Rail Regulation March

13 Level 2 (managed) The health and safety policy is up to date and is communicated within the organisation, but local managers and supervisors have inconsistent approaches or interpretations. This results in the policy being applied in different ways across the organisation. The policy is not seen as vital to maintaining safety. Level 1 (ad hoc) The policy statement is out of date or has not been communicated within the organisation. There is no evidence of employees being consulted. Relevant parts of the Railways and other Guided Transport Systems (Safety) Regulations 2006 Schedule 1, 2 (a) a statement of the safety policy which has been approved by the chief executive and communicated to all persons carrying out work or voluntary work directly in relation to the operation; Subcriterion SP3: Board governance This establishes executive accountability for the management and performance of the organisation s work and results. From a health and safety perspective, business governance involves: defining the organisation s tolerance to risk; defining and communicating the organisation s goals for health and safety (see also the section on policy); establishing the business workflows and structure needed to meet the organisation s goals for health and safety (see also the section on organising for control and communication); defining measures of the organisation s business goals, and performance measures for the activities to achieve the business goals; developing and communicating the organisation s policies to guide actions and decide how work is performed in the organisation (this is also covered in leadership); Office of Rail Regulation March

14 making sure that the responsibilities and activities of each part of the organisation work together to control the health and safety requirements of the products, services and business needs of the organisation (this is also covered in planning and implementing); and monitoring the workflow of the different parts of the organisation and how those parts rely on each other (this is also covered in the monitoring and review criteria). There is more guidance on governance in the Hutton-Cave, Turnbull and Baker reports, the combined code and the Walker Report. Level of achievement according to evidence Goal (excellence) The board shows a balanced approach to continuous improvement, looking for examples of good practice from outside the organisation that will add value to the business and challenge management to deliver improvement. Executive members of the board show a commitment to identifying areas for improvement and effectively manage how the improvements are put into practice. Non-executive members are ready, able and encouraged to test strategies put forward by the executive members. The organisation knows about and regularly measures its activities against recognised good practice. The board carries out a formal and extensive evaluation of its own performance against health and safety objectives. Level 4 (predictable) Non-executive directors have a strong and independent role in challenging safety issues. Health and safety risk is recognised as part of the overall risk to the organisation. Appropriate training is provided to board members, particularly non-executive directors, so they can understand the business risk of the organisation. Level 3 (standardised) The board and executives show a clear wide-ranging understanding of the business as a system. Office of Rail Regulation March

15 It is clear how responsibilities relating to health and safety are defined both between the board and the executive management. Level 2 (managed) Executive management bring activities in line with the organisation s goals. They approve, measure and manage the business activities of the organisation s individual parts. The board is not as thorough as possible in reviewing the effectiveness of risk controls within the organisation. There is little difference between the role of the board and the role of the executive. Level 1 (ad hoc) The board shows little or no consideration of health and safety issues. Relevant parts of the Railways and other Guided Transport Systems (Safety) Regulations 2006 Schedule 1, 1 (d) show how continuous improvement of the safety management system is ensured. Subcriterion SP4: Written safety management system The purpose of the written safety management system is indicated in Schedule 1, 1 of the Railways and other Guided Transport Systems (Safety) Regulations In particular, the safety management system will: (a) describe the distribution of responsibilities, within the operation, for the safety management system; (b) show how control of the safety management system by the management on different levels is secured; (c) show how persons carrying out work (or voluntary work) directly in relation to the operation and their representatives on all levels, are involved with the safety management system; and (d) show how continuous improvement of the safety management system is ensured. Office of Rail Regulation March

16 Also, the safety management system will contain information relating to the specific elements in schedules 1 and 2 of the Railways and other Guided Transport Systems (Safety) Regulations The written safety management system allows the organisation to set out how risk will be controlled within the organisation and how the risk controls will be kept under review. The written safety management system arrangements should reflect what happens in reality and be supported by more detailed procedures, standards, guidance and forms which form the day-to-day parts of the safety management system. Level of achievement according to evidence Goal (excellence) The written safety management system demonstrates how the organisation will identify opportunities to improve, not only against its own targets but against other organisations targets which have been identified as being excellent. Level 4 (predictable) The written safety management system presents a clear approach to managing safety. It shows how the organisation proactively controls risk through continual improvement of its internal arrangements. Level 3 (standardised) The written safety management system presents a systematic approach to controlling risk, with appropriate checks and balances, and all aspects of health and safety are considered. Level 2 (managed) The written safety management system meets the elements laid down in Schedule 1 of the Railways and other Guided Transport Systems (Safety) Regulations There is evidence of the safety management system being used properly and meeting regulation 19 of the Railways and other Guided Transport Systems (Safety) Regulations It is not clear how more general occupational health and safety arrangements are applied. Level 1 (ad hoc) There is no written safety management system, or it is incomplete. Office of Rail Regulation March

17 Relevant parts of the Railways and other Guided Transport Systems (Safety) Regulations 2006 ROGS Regulation 19 (5) elements Schedule 1 (all of it) Office of Rail Regulation March

18 Criterion OP: Securing co-operation, competence and development of employees at all levels Purpose To find out whether the organisation has employees with the competencies (knowledge, skills, experience and abilities) needed to perform effectively, efficiently and safely. To see if the organisation s recruitment, selection, training and development policies focus, as far as possible, on meeting the organisation s health and safety objectives. To prove how much the organisation consults its employees at all levels to make sure that knowledge and experience are shared and health and safety becomes 'everybody's business'. Introductory notes Employees involvement supports risk control by encouraging their 'ownership' of health and safety policies and procedures. It makes sure the organisation as a whole, and people working in it, benefit from good health and safety performance. Sharing knowledge and experience means that health and safety becomes 'everybody's business'. Organisations need an effective system for managing competence to help make sure that their staff have the appropriate skills. Making sure that workers, supervisors and managers have, and keep, the appropriate skills helps those members of staff to carry out their work safely, reducing risks to themselves and to other people. ORR guidance on competence management systems ( Developing and maintaining staff competence, Railway Safety Publication 1, second edition, published in 2007) explains the legal basis for duties relating to competence management systems. Subcriteria OP1: Worker involvement and internal co-operation OP2: Competence management system Office of Rail Regulation March

19 Subcriterion OP1: Worker involvement and internal co-operation By law, all employees in Great Britain must be consulted on, not just told about, health and safety issues in the workplace that affect them. There are two sets of general regulations under which a duty holder must consult the workforce about health and safety: the Safety Representatives and Safety Committees Regulations 1977; and the Health and Safety (Consultation with Employees) Regulations These regulations encourage employers and employees to work together to: develop, maintain and promote measures for protecting health and safety at work; and check the effectiveness of those measures. Successful organisations often go further than the law specifies and actively encourage and support consultation in different ways. Effective organisations will actively involve the workforce to encourage them to use their knowledge and experience and build commitment to achieving shared objectives. Level of achievement according to evidence Goal (excellence) The organisation makes full use of its employees potential and actively involves them to develop shared values and a culture of trust, openness and empowerment. The organisation uses involvement to gather ideas for improvement and put them into practice. Employees show that they understand how they contribute to achieving the organisation s goals. That understanding is consistent with the organisation s relevant policies and vision of the senior team. Employees show a commitment to exceeding those goals by following existing processes and indicating where they can be improved. Office of Rail Regulation March

20 Level 4 (predictable) The organisation has a policy of seeking to involve employees at all levels of the organisation, and there is a clear structure through which it can communicate this policy. The organisation regularly consults its workforce in a range of ways, such as through surveys, workshops, meetings with managers and safety tours. Employees are motivated to deliver the business objectives and demonstrate a consistent understanding of how this is achieved. Employees feel able to make decisions within a goals-setting framework. People in similar roles apply standards consistently. Employees understand the need for change and confirm that they are consulted on how changes are introduced. Level 3 (standardised) The organisation has a way of making sure that employees are consulted on health and safety matters. Employees understand how they contribute to their safety and the safety of the railway. People in similar roles apply standards in the same way. Level 2 (managed) Employees understand that they are responsible for their own safety and colleagues, but this is not consistent across the organisation. There is some consultation on health and safety matters, but it is not carried out in a systematic way or it does not involve all employees. Level 1 (ad hoc) There is little or no consultation. Employees do not understand how they contribute to their own safety and to the safety of the people that they work with, Office of Rail Regulation March

21 Relevant parts of the Railways and other Guided Transport Systems (Safety) Regulations 2006 Regulation 19 (5) Every transport operator shall make and give effect to such arrangements as are appropriate, having regard to the nature of his activities and the extent of the undertaking, for the effective planning, organisation, control, monitoring and review of the measures identified pursuant to paragraph (1) or (3) and shall record such arrangements Schedule 1, 1 (c) show how persons carrying out work or voluntary work directly in relation to the operation and their representatives on all levels are involved with the safety management system; Subcriterion OP2: Competence management system Under regulation 24 of the Railways and other Guided Transport Systems (Safety) Regulations 2006 (see below), workers carrying out specific work that has a major effect on safety must be competent to carry out that work. To meet the requirements of this regulation most organisations will need to have a system for managing competence. Once a competence management system is set up it can be applied more widely than the safety-critical tasks defined in regulation 24, and excellent organisations will apply the same system to make sure all employees are competent in their roles. Level of achievement according to evidence Goal (excellence) The organisation makes full use of its employees potential and actively involves them through shared values and a culture of trust, openness and empowerment. The organisation uses employee involvement to gather ideas for improvement and put them into practice. Level 4 (predictable) Policies on recruitment, selection and training are in line with identified objectives. They are based on thorough risk assessments of tasks, to create a clear competence management system. Mentoring is used and changes of role are well planned-out. Office of Rail Regulation March

22 Level 3 (standardised) The organisation has an effective competence management system in place. This covers the competencies needed to meet the objectives of the business and to manage risks. The organisation has ways of making full use of the competencies of their staff. Appropriate priority is given to managing competence by sharing resources. Level 2 (managed) Training is provided within business units, but this does not form part of a clear competence management system. Recruitment, selection and training policies are not in line with the business objectives. Training is provided by chance as and when training needs are identified locally. Level 1 (ad hoc) There is no evidence of any clear approach to managing competence. Employees may have the competencies they need, but there are no arrangements to check this. Relevant parts of the Railways and other Guided Transport Systems (Safety) Regulations 2006 Regulation 24 (for safety critical work) (1) Every controller of safety critical work shall, so far as is reasonably practicable, ensure that a person under his management, supervision or control, with the exception of where that person is receiving practical training in a safety critical task, only carries out safety critical work where (a) that person has been assessed as being competent and fit to carry out that work following an assessment by an assessor; (b) there is an accurate and up to date record in writing of that person's competence and fitness which references any criteria for determining competence and fitness against which that assessment of competence was made; (c) the record, or an accurate summary of the record referred to in sub-paragraph (b) is available for inspection, on reasonable request, by any other controller of safety critical work or any operator who may be affected by any safety critical work carried out or to be carried out by that person, for the purposes of establishing that person's competence and fitness to carry out safety critical work; and Office of Rail Regulation March

23 (d) there are in place arrangements for monitoring the competence and fitness of that person. (2) Every controller of safety critical work shall without unreasonable delay review any person's competence or fitness assessment where (a) they have reason to doubt the competence or fitness of a person to carry out that safety critical work; or (b) there has been a significant change in the matters to which the assessment relates, and where, as a result of any such review a reassessment of competence or fitness is required, that reassessment of competence or fitness shall be carried out to ensure that the requirements of paragraph (1) are met. (3) Where a reassessment of competence or fitness under paragraph (2) is required, the controller of safety critical work shall, so far as is reasonably practicable ensure that, as a result, the health and safety of persons on a transport system is not prejudiced. Schedule 1, 2 (e) provision of programmes for training of persons carrying out work or voluntary work directly in relation to the operation and systems to ensure that the competence of such persons is maintained and that they carry out tasks accordingly; Office of Rail Regulation March

24 Criterion OC: Organising for control and communication Purpose To set out responsibilities for meeting the organisation's health and safety objectives. To make sure that important information is available to those making decisions. To make sure the organisation s arrangements and actions promote a culture that makes excellence in risk control possible. To make sure that organisations have controls in place to make sure that risks are identified and adequately controlled. Introductory notes Health and safety policies set the direction for health and safety, but organisations need to create a strong framework for management activities. They also need to set out the relationships and responsibilities that will improve performance. Two important areas within this framework are control and communication. Control is the foundation of a positive health and safety culture, and maintaining control is central to all management functions. Control of health and safety is achieved by allocating and carrying out responsibilities which relate to health and safety objectives. It is important that all levels of staff from the board down accept their allocated health and safety responsibilities. Safety representatives can also make an important contribution. Staff should be focused on developing and maintaining systems of control before events happen not on blaming people for failures after events. Communication is often a challenge to organisations. It is important that the messages which senior managers want people to understand are the ones the people actually hear. Effective communication about health and safety relies on accurate and clear information coming into the organisation, flowing within it, and going out from it. Subcriteria OC1: Allocation of responsibilities OC2: Management credibility and supervisory performance OC3: Organisational structure (management cascade etc.) OC4: Communication arrangements OC5: System safety and interface arrangements OC6: Culture management OC7: Record keeping Office of Rail Regulation March

25 Subcriterion OC1: Allocation of responsibilities This means giving people and teams roles, tasks and objectives which work together to meet the organisation's health and safety objectives. This contributes to having the right people doing the right thing at the right time. Level of achievement according to evidence Goal (excellence) As for level 4 below, with evidence that staff at all levels take responsibility within a strong management framework. Level 4 (predictable) As for level 3 below, with clear links between the organisation s objectives and individual responsibility. Individuals show that they understand how their activities affect the organisation. Safety activities and decision-making activities are given to the people who are best placed to carry them out. Health and safety responsibilities are allocated with the same consideration as other business responsibilities. This makes sure that the right resources are available and used. Level 3 (standardised) Responsibilities are identified and given in writing to teams or individuals who accept them in order to meet health and safety objectives. Level 2 (managed) Important safety roles are allocated, some in job descriptions or objectives, though not consistently. Most staff, but not all, know what is expected of them. There is no overall policy on, or evidence of, responsibility being allocated in a consistent and systematic way. Level 1 (ad hoc) Health and safety roles, tasks and objectives are not defined, or not defined well enough. Responsibilities relating to safety are not allocated to individuals and teams. Office of Rail Regulation March

26 Responsibilities relating to safety are not recorded in job descriptions. Relevant parts of the Railways and other Guided Transport Systems (Safety) Regulations 2006 Regulation 19 (5) Every transport operator shall make and give effect to such arrangements as are appropriate, having regard to the nature of his activities and the extent of the undertaking, for the effective planning, organisation, control, monitoring and review of the measures identified pursuant to paragraph (1) or (3) and shall record such arrangements. Schedule 1, 1 (a) describe the distribution of responsibilities, within the operation, for the safety management system; (b) show how control of the safety management system by the management on different levels is secured; Subcriterion OC2: Management and supervisory accountability Those given roles, tasks and objectives relating to safety should be accountable for meeting the safety objectives they are responsible for. Adequate supervision, along with providing information, instruction and training, is needed to make sure that an organisation s health and safety policy is effectively put in place and developed. Good supervision can form a powerful part of a proper system of management. Level of achievement according to evidence Goal (excellence) As level 4, but with evidence of the organisation actively seeking to draw in good management practice from other world-class organisations. Level 4 (predictable) As for level 3 below, but with competent managers and supervisors having control to make sure they consistently meet their own safety responsibilities. There are effective and fair reward systems to reinforce good behaviour. Supervisory processes are aligned to monitoring systems and information management to give total confidence in actual safety performance. Systems are in place to tackle non-achievement. Office of Rail Regulation March

27 Level 3 (standardised) Teams and individuals responsible for controlling significant risks are regularly overseen. There are processes in place to allow managers to identify failings and use appraisal systems to correct problems. Level 2 (managed) Some processes for controlling responsibilities have been given out, through procedures or performance reviews, but not for all significant risks. Level 1 (ad hoc) Managers and supervisors rarely, if ever, hold their staff to account for their safety duties. There is inconsistency between accountability for safety and accountability for other business objectives. Relevant parts of the Railways and other Guided Transport Systems (Safety) Regulations 2006 Regulation 19 (5) Every transport operator shall make and give effect to such arrangements as are appropriate, having regard to the nature of his activities and the extent of the undertaking, for the effective planning, organisation, control, monitoring and review of the measures identified pursuant to paragraph (1) or (3) and shall record such arrangements. Schedule 1, 1 (b) show how control of the safety management system by the management on different levels is secured; Subcriterion OC3: Organisational structure The purpose of this subcriterion is to aid an understanding of how the organisation is structured to meet the organisation s safety policy. There may be layers of work that support this from policy and strategic perspectives. Risk controls should fit sensibly into management structures so that responsibility for meeting the business objectives safely is clear and effectively deals with interfaces. Office of Rail Regulation March

28 Level of achievement according to evidence Goal (excellence) As for level 4 below, but with effective reviews of the organisation s structure, at all levels, against achievement of business objectives. Level 4 (predictable) As for level 3 below, but with responsibilities from the top to the bottom of the organisation, not just at working levels, being in line with each other. Level 3 (standardised) Responsibility for risk-control systems is in line with responsibility for other business objectives. This provides clarity and consistency between similar activities and business units. Overall policies and strategies are consistent with those of the relevant business units. Level 2 (managed) The structure of the organisation means that most risks are managed by the people or teams carrying out the work, but some risks are split so that there is or could be conflict between safety and other objectives. There is little consistency between the activities of a business unit and the wider aims of a strategy or policy. Level 1 (ad hoc) The organisation's management structures bear no relation to its safety objectives, so staff responsibilities and accountabilities are easily confused. Relevant parts of the Railways and other Guided Transport Systems (Safety) Regulations 2006 Regulation 19 (5) Every transport operator shall make and give effect to such arrangements as are appropriate, having regard to the nature of his activities and the extent of the undertaking, for the effective planning, organisation, control, monitoring and review of the measures identified pursuant to paragraph (1) or (3) and shall record such arrangements. Schedule 1, 1 (b) show how control of the safety management system by the management on different levels is secured; Office of Rail Regulation March

29 Subcriterion OC4: Internal communication arrangements These arrangements make sure that any member of staff making a decision or performing a task has the right information, in the form of: corporate messages; procedures and standards; factual data and intelligence; and instructions and reports. Level of achievement according to evidence Goal (excellence) Communication arrangements are kept under regular review against identified good practice in other sectors. Level 4 (predictable) Everything listed at level 3 below is in line with the main risk-control systems. The right information is available for making decisions. Effective procedures for gathering feedback make sure that communications are understood. Level 3 (standardised) Most of the following applies. o Written business-safety objectives, standards and procedures for controlling significant risks are in formats suitable for users. o Factual information is used to share experiences and guide future performance and decisions. o Managers give instructions which reinforce procedures to help achieve safety objectives. o Staff report their performance and experiences because the organisation encourages them to do so. Level 2 (managed) Some procedures and standards relating to risk controls are available to staff. Some information is used to guide decisions. Office of Rail Regulation March

30 Managers give instructions and receive reports relating to controlling risks, but there is a lack of consistency. Level 1 (ad hoc) There is little attempt to find or communicate information. If procedures are in place, staff make decisions based on their own judgement. No intelligence collected or shared. Managers do not talk to staff, or talk ineffectively. Relevant parts of the Railways and other Guided Transport Systems (Safety) Regulations 2006 Regulation 19 (5) Every transport operator shall make and give effect to such arrangements as are appropriate, having regard to the nature of his activities and the extent of the undertaking, for the effective planning, organisation, control, monitoring and review of the measures identified pursuant to paragraph (1) or (3) and shall record such arrangements. Schedule 1, 1 (b) show how control of the safety management system by the management on different levels is secured; (f) arrangements for the provision of sufficient information relevant to safety (i) within the operation in question; and (ii) between the operator in question and any other transport operator or an applicant for a safety certificate or a safety authorisation who carries out or who intends to carry out operations on the same infrastructure; (g) procedures and formats for the documentation of safety information; (h) procedures to control the lay out of, and changes to, vital safety information; Office of Rail Regulation March

31 Subcriterion OC5: System safety and interface arrangements Risk Management (PI1) deals with the identification of interfaces and the associated risk controls. Effective teamwork and co-operation are needed to implement these controls and make sure systems across the organisation are safe. Level of achievement according to evidence Goal (excellence) As for level 4 below, and also looks to other sectors and countries to identify system-safety issues and developments to feed into these arrangements, where appropriate. Teamwork is used to get the best possible achievement of shared objectives. Where appropriate, good practice is shared with other organisations in the UK and the rest of the world. Level 4 (predictable) All of 3, relating to all system safety and interface issues. Decisions and arrangements are consistent with the full range of information listed in level 3. There are arrangements for sharing information throughout the organisation in order to promote effective reviews and continual improvement. Level 3 (standardised) Organisational interfaces are systematically identified. Procedures and standards are in place to control shared risks. There are written objectives for system safety. There is regular discussion with other organisations to agree objectives, standards, processes and arrangements. There are ways to share information at working levels. Communications outside the organisation are satisfactory to make sure that anyone making a decision relating to risk controls with cross organisational boundaries is in possession of the right information (in the form of procedures and standards); factual data and intelligence; and instructions and reports. Office of Rail Regulation March

32 Level 2 (managed) Procedures identify interfaces between business units at a working level. There is liaison with the other organisations over procedures and standards implemented. These are used by staff for some shared risk controls. There is co-ordination of practical issues at working level between individuals of organisations but there is no overall organisation, resulting in inefficient planning and execution. Level 1 (ad hoc) The organisation makes little attempt to identify or collaborate on work with other organisations in respect of shared risk controls. Procedures to achieve this are weak or do not exist. No information is collected or shared. Relevant parts of the Railways and other Guided Transport Systems (Safety) Regulations 2006 Regulation 19 (5) Every transport operator shall make and give effect to such arrangements as are appropriate, having regard to the nature of his activities and the extent of the undertaking, for the effective planning, organisation, control, monitoring and review of the measures identified pursuant to paragraph (1) or (3) and shall record such arrangements. Subcriterion OC6: Organisational culture This subcriterion is about developing and maintaining a culture which brings out the best possible performance from staff. The organisation s safety culture is what emerges over time when its risk-management systems are applied. There are three main ways of finding out about an organisation s safety culture. 1. By routinely gathering informal information about the safety culture during inspections, investigations and other dealings with employers and the workforce. For instance, workers on site during a routine preventive inspection may comment that performance pressures sometimes take priority over risk controls. In this case, as well as investigating the allegation, the background should be recorded to build up a picture of the organisation s safety culture. 2. An organisation may have recently carried out a safety culture or safety climate assessment. These assessments can provide useful information on Office of Rail Regulation March